My biggest issue with this movie was completely personal. I don’t really like it when superheroes are brought to real wars that happened in history, unless they have a fitting enemy for them – all throughout the movie. But then again, I know this is not really a fair complainment, because it’s just part Wonder Woman’s backstory anyway.

In the other hand the action is awesome, and the character is lovable. That’s already a million times better than the other recent DC movies. I’m satisfied.

I think it’s a fair complaint. Wonder Woman’s backstory really doesn’t have to involve her getting involved in a real world war. Heck, most modern versions don’t even bring that up.
The only superhero who’s origin is deeply tied to a real life war is Captain America. Since he was created specifically to fight Nazi’s.

I can’t really complain it was good but i now what you mean, asside from the WW1 setting this movie didn’t do anything real different from the 2009 animated Wonder Woman movie. in the end it was the same thing. go defeat Ares and everyone’s happy. that was my gripe with the movie.

“i only whispered in their ear” then after being defeated the war should have continued

I went in hearing it was great, so being a minor Wonder Woman fan, I was pretty eager to see it. The first half hour was really good to me and it got me invested. But by the time they left the island, it was pretty much stuff I saw before in the first Thor and Captain America movies. In fact, the whole movie feels like a fusion of those two. So to some up my opinion “Tardy to the Party AGAIN DC…but you brought a hot chick, so we’ll forgive you THIS time.”

Never claimed Marvel “invented” those, just saying they did them first, and to see it again done differently was…boring. I still think it was ok, it just didn’t blow me away, and I think ppl are confusing “doesn’t suck like the others” with “great movie” is all.

This film was for me, very safe and generic. It is then topped off with a pretty awful ending which leaves it a 5/10. Her whole drive was to kill Ares who might not even be the root of the problem in the first place, and when she kills who she believes is Ares, she realises that conflict isn’t as simple as killing the big baddie, but then…The big baddie does show up, looks ridiculous, still plays with the same theme of humanity being corrupt. But when he dies, boom! War over, everyone is happy. Wtf? Also I felt the characters she goes to war with are very one dimensional. I’d say the only good thing this film had going for it was Steve and Diana’s relationship.

You’re not thinking about this fourth dimensionally, even if Areas death stops WWI. WWII still happens, all that war, death, and the development of the most destructive weapons in human existence happens all with out his involvement.

Since Tamera really is diabetic, I’m surprised she allowed the “sugar will kill me” bit in there. Diabetics can have sugar, they have to be careful with it and monitor it and that piece of cake was pretty huge for anyone, let-alone a diabetic, but she could have eaten some of it just fine. (Granted if she’s Type 1 it’s incredibly harder for her to do it and she has to pretty much constantly keep her insulin levels in check and watch what she eats but she could still eat a piece of cake and live so long as she boosts her insulin level with a shot or pump.)

1. That’s not what “white knighting” means. It refers to defending someone in order to curry their favor or to get something out of it. It is not being offended on behalf of someone who isn’t offended.

2. This is more important. What you just described DID NOT HAPPEN. Feminist men did not start arguing that the film was not feminist enough. The very thing you are saying is typical behavior DID NOT HAPPEN.

And that’s the problem. You got 17 upvotes for this at the time I am writing this. Yet what you said is provably false.

That is the reason for the rise of SJWs. No longer can we just talk about these things. When one side genuinely believes things that are factually not true, how can you have a rational discussion?

I mean, I even know that my post won’t convince any of you. I only post for others who might be able to listen.

Because you will assert that these things really do happen. You will cite some small group of jerks who did it, and continue to assert that it’s what always happens.

It didn’t happen, and hopefully those who do read this will realize that this means that your assessment of what male feminists do is faulty.

Feminism, like most ideologies, isn’t about who is offended, but about a set of principles. Whether women are offended is beside the point on whether something is or isn’t feminist.

And, even if something fails on some principles, it’s okay to criticize something that’s good. It’s also okay to not like something, or even be offended by it. Not because other people are offended, but because it betrays the principles you uphold.

This idea that we are offended on someone else’s behalf ignores the actual claims being made.

And you can disagree with them. You can disagree with the principles. And then we can discuss things and compromise.

Or you can make claims about how horrible we are, and we’re stuck at the same impasse I describe above. The one that created the SJW movement.

Speaking as a DCEU fan, I like to thank you, Doug, for giving a positive review of one of these movies for once. Honestly, I didn’t watch your reviews of Batman v Superman or Suicide Squad, because I already knew that they are comprised with 50% whining and 50% bitching on a movie that doesn’t deserve that much hate and negativity. I just don’t take to kindly with reviews on movies that I genially like or love, because I always like to think as positive as possible, and I feel that negative reviews like these are saying to me “If you like this certain movie, you are retarded.” So, thanks again for making this review as positive as your reviews on movies like Mad Max: Fury Road and Star Wars Episode VII.

I’d say, if anything, Batman v Superman deserved more disdain, revulsion and infuriation at just how shit it was than was actually provided in the review. It is, in my opinion, worse than what had previously been the ultimate bad superman film, Superman IV: The Quest for Peace. At least that movie is so bad in a special way, it is laughable. At least it has some form of humour. At least Superman doesn’t look like he’s ten seconds away from committing suicide, and can actually act (seriously, Cavill is awful in his portrayal. I don’t know why, since he can act, but he’s so dull and lifeless in MoS and BvS). It is visually ugly, depressing, morose, boring, lifeless and pointless. It has characters who are annoyingly hypocritical, stupid, badly written and badly acted. It’s got one of the worst screen plays that any superhero film has had over the past decade and a half, and it insults the legacy of both of its central characters.

It single-handedly managed to convince me the DCCU is not worth investing any time, money or effort into, regardless of what they make it’s still got the stink of Man of Steel and Batman v Superman, so I refuse to watch another DC movie until the next inevitable reboot.

I disagree about Cavill’s performance, at least I wouldn’t fault him for playing Superman that way since I actually see Superman being portrayed that way most of the time, and he was probably instructed to act that way.

I do agree with you about BvS however, it got too much credit because of the idea behind it I think. It’s an awesome idea to make a Hollywood movie out of, but it makes it even worse since it didn’t portray it well, but that’s subjective, so I can get why younger people or non-comic or superhero lovers might see through that and rate it better.

The opposite can be said about Suicide Squad. Imo it was just too harshly because of the lack of The Joker, even though it wasn’t his movie, and a good villain. But plenty of the characters got deep enough and were well played while also having plenty of enjoyable scenes. It basically did most of the things well a Suicide Squad movie should.

Wonder Woman was a borderline decent movie. Not fantastic not terrible, not great, not bad. Just right there in the middle as a “meh, it’s a movie” style film. My issues with the film comes from everyone raving about how good it is when it really doesn’t deserve that. People claim “It’s better than other dc movies”, but I even disagree with that, because if you compare it to the Dark Knight Trilogy then I think it ranks third in best DCEU movies. The worst issue with this film is that it’s based on the New 52 line and a DC animated movie called Wonder Woman released in 2009 was already made for that comic story with the exact same plot. The difference is that the animated movie takes place in modern day which is the only difference between them. I’ve never seen a company rip itself off before, but there you go. The jokes are bad, the characters exist just to make Diana look better, and the action is perfectly over the top, but leaves me with no worry at all that Wonder Woman will be able to deal with it. There’s one scene where she flips an armored panzer and the germans keep attacking her anyway. At that point I’d just be like, “No, I give up. Sorry, I’m done. There is just no way.” I don’t care how badass someone is, if their opponent can lift a tank then they win.. unless your batman then you always win always. Again it’s not a bad movie, it’s perfectly fine for being a movie, but it’s not this amazing blockbuster that everyone wants to pretend it is.

Why did you do no Star Wars jokes for the final fight, I mean the bad guy talks about giving into hate and joining him while shooting lightning, my brother and I couldn’t stop making Sidious, and some Vader jokes/lines/memes during it.

Honestly, I didn’t think this film was that great. It was decent, but not mind-blowing. I get what you mean about Wondie going onto the battlefield being strong for a very different reason than most superhero films, and the way you describe it is the way I wish they’d portrayed Superman. Personally, I really wish Man of Steel hadn’t happened and instead we got something more close to what you talk of here, but better scripted than the actual film of Wonder Woman. Again, I didn’t dislike the film by any stretch, but it was… acceptable.
I think the weirdest aspect is the fact it’s set in World War 1. I mean, not only was the original version supposed to be World War II, but WWII makes more sense from a film making perspective, since no country came out looking at all positively when it came to WWI, whereas WWII had the formation of a group of countries specifically dedicated to promoting cooperation and peace between them, and all countries devoted resources and money afterwards to rebuild each other. I feel like Wondie fits more with WWI than II.

Which is a problem when the film itself only ever shows the Germans as the bad guy. There’s a grand total of 1 Bad Guy on the british side and that’s because he’s the God of War in disguise! It’s like they forgot the Nazi’s weren’t in World War 1 or something. It’s hard to believe their story there is badness in everyone when you never show any good Germans or any Bad British people (Or heck, any of the other Numerous factions in the war).

That was one of my problems with the film. It portrays things in a not-very-interesting way in terms of the complexities. In fact, most often it seems to ignore how complicated and corrupt WWI was, and how horrendous every country came across by the end. Especially how Germany was treated like shit afterwards, to the degree that its economy, infrastructure and social climate was decimated, and basically caused the exact environment from which a party like the Nazis would thrive and cause the problems they did.

In the film, they basically treated it like the Germans were the bad guys, and there was mild corruption (mostly Ares’ fault) on the part of other sides… except America which is portrayed as obnoxiously virtuous. The film does a bad job portraying WWI, so id they were going to make it feel like WWII anyway, why not just MAKE it WWII? Again, it’s more accurate to the source material, it’s by far the bigger war, it’s easier to write, and you don’t run the risk of, as this film does, way oversimplifying the complex nature of the war where all sides were in the wrong, which the film doesn’t portray well.

A buddy of mine picked apart some of the weapons and the use of the tank…you know, the historical accuracy part.

He never mentioned how getting from somewhere near Turkey to somewhere near London in one night (by boat) was supposed to work.

I liked the movie. I did not like how amazons (who had been disconnected from the world of man for thousands of years and did not seem to understand exactly what guns were) SPOKE ALL MODERN LANGUAGES. English is nothing like it was, nor is any other language. It wouldn’t have annoyed me as much if she didn’t point out how she spoke ancient Greek. She spoke native American languages even though that part of the world was not known to the ancient Greeks.

(Sorry, long post.) It was only an “okay” movie for me. [SPOILERY] I had problems with how naive they made her. She acts so worldly and wise like she knows how humanity works better than, you know, humanity (whom she’s never met or interacted with, btw) and yet acts profoundly stupid when it comes to realizing that maybe, just MAYBE, she’s wrong. And yeah, right after teasing us with showing she might finally have the epiphany that humanity isn’t all sweetness and light, and that their flaws are all somehow the fault of one easily defeatable foe… nope! Here’s your big easy bad guy! And in the end, they have to fridge her (way more relatable and charismatic) boyfriend for her to finally channel enough power to win. Stuff like this really reminds me that these characters were truly meant for children.

I dislike the misrepresentation as WW as a symbol of love and peace and understanding. They sure pay enough lip service to it, but she never actually demonstrates anything but violence. I kept waiting for her to solve a problem with kindness, or compromise, or by changing someone’s mind. But nope! She never changes ANYONE’S mind, and doesn’t solve a single problem except through force.

And lastly, though I meant to keep this short, I know there’s that whole DC vs Marvel hero “type”; they say that we admire the Marvel heroes because we can relate to them, because we see their flaw and how they overcome them, while the DC heroes (minus Batman, always minus Batman) are more like GODS, and people can look up to them and aspire to be like them. But what qualities does this WW have that we can aspire to? Do we ever see her be particularly kind or generous or understanding? Does she ever really sacrifice anything? She loses exactly one person she cared about, but to me, how can one aspire to be someone who’s literally created by a god, who’s never known humanity, or suffering, or compromise, etc? For me, I compare her to Captain America on one particular point: bravery, something that can be said to be the most necessary feature of heroism. Courage is not the absence of fear, but being afraid and going forward anyway. Steve Rogers knew fear, and yet even as skinny Steve, he was leaping on grenades, willing to sacrifice himself to save others. (“A weak man knows the value of strength” and all that.) But while everyone keeps raving about how inspiring the scene of Diane going over the trenches into no-man’s land is, how it brought tears to their eyes and all, I couldn’t see the heroism, because it cost her literally nothing to do it. She was invulnerable. She had nothing TO lose. And she demonstrated no empathy for the men who would absolutely have done as she did IF THEY COULD, BUT THEY COULDN’T. Instead it was treated as some empowering moment of “doing the right thing, not like these quivering cowards over here with their excuses!” Sorry, but I just can’t get behind it.

Overall, it was far better assembled than the other DC films (minus Batman, always minus Batman) and it was mostly competently put together. It had decent humor, and Chris Pine was delightful. But the villain(s) were weak, their justifications were weak, and the fact that defeating them literally cleared up the bad blood of WWI like a breeze blowing away a cloud left a bad taste in my mouth. Again, I realize these are – and should be – mostly for children. And that’s fine. Children don’t need nuance or moral greys in their superhero movies. But if they were honestly going for that kind of movie, why place it in WWI?

(Admittedly, I didn’t watch the review before I posted. But even after having seen it, I stand by my points, and I respectfully disagree with the NC’s opinions on the appeal of this movie and of its DC offering.)

I liked Ares in the movie. Maybe I liked it more since I really liked the New 52 Wonder Woman (for me the best comic book in the reboot) and I really tought the ideas they used were very interesting for the character.
Since the movie was going for a mix of old and newer comics (Diana’s origin as being the daughter of Zeus is mostly Brian Azzarello’s New 52 Wonder Woman), the idea of a wahsed out old man as Ares isn’t all that farfashed, since it is the idea he is always and constatly working througout history that ‘aged’ him unlike the other gods… And, let’s be honest: David Thewlis is awesome.
He is great as V.M. Varga in the current season of Fargo and even if he isn’t a physical threat, he is a pretty menacing and intimidating person (again, Fargo proves it with spades) as well as a great actor. Maybe overmonologing by the end, sure, but I felt it kind of needed for the character (since he is more of a metaphore than a real threat and he being a metaphore is kind of the point – that ‘war’ is not a person or a ‘thing’ – and the monologue is part of the meta angle they were going for).

This works much better alone than connecting it to the other films IMO. You have Wonder Woman learning the flaws in humanity and yet states that she will never lose faith in them. Then BvS states that she has given up on them, effectively contradicting the hopeful ending of the film and having Ares win. Granted, it’s not the film’s fault; it just has to deal with Snyder’s misguided decisions. Correct me if I got it wrong.

The movie was charming and extremely enjoyable for me. 🙂 Not only did this movie finally show me the appeal of modern DC (when done right), but I actually saw homage to my beloved Donner Superman in those glasses, trench coat, and hat, while saving our lead lad from roughians in a dark alley! 😀

Well, there’s this little matter of folks who borrow clips of a movie which is currently in theaters getting into legal trouble and said videos getting taken down by the big corporations. If you know a way these guys can review a current theatrical release while using clips of said movie which isn’t going to get their video taken down, I’m sure they’d love to hear it.

How long has Doug been doing this? It’s a review of a movie that’s still playing in theaters. Did you really think that there would be clips? That thing would get taken down by the copyright police before it was even up!

“Then why doesn’t he wait until he can get a DVD of the movie?”

Because he wants to review the movie while it’s still current and it won’t be current six months from now. Also, the fact that older movies have also gotten taken down is YouTube’s issue, not Doug’s, and the fact that you personally don’t don’t like clip less likewise isn’t Doug’s problem. Just don’t click on the video and that’ll solve that problem.

Bottom line: YouTube needs to revise it’s policies regarding fair use. Doug isn’t the internet; It’s not his responsibility. It’s YouTube that you should be angry with, not Doug.

“(Doug) got videos taken down even when reviewing years-old movies so that doesn’t change anything and is not a valid excuse.”

Actually, it IS a valid excuse, because it’s a testament to how messed up the internet’s (particularly YouTube’s) copyright policies are right now. A review of a years-old movie boasting clips may get taken down, but a review of a current movie boasting clips *definitely* will. It’s why James Rolfe is currently using stills in his reviews rather than clips, heck it’s why Doug’s on Vid.Me now.

The rules on Fair Use need to be examined and rethought before any of this going to change, until then, content creators are going to do what they have to do in order to keep producing content without receiving strikes or take-downs, and one way of accomplishing that is clipless reviews. Don’t like that? Either lobby to change things or just don’t click on the clipless reviews. Complaining about clipless reviews is pointless to me because these guys are giving you entertainment for free; you’re not paying for any of it nor are you being forced to look at it. Don’t like the video? Don’t click on it. If you’re watching a video and aren’t enjoying what you see, then stop said video and do something else. It’s not complicated. But whining and moaning about clipless reviews accomplishes as much as stamping your feet and holding your breath, which is to say, nothing at all.

Advertisement

Spotlight Section

Featured Producer

Join Some Jerk With A Camera on location at Disneyland, California (and occasionally other theme parks!) for a series of whacked-out, irreverently irrelevant digress-alicious trips through some of the best and worst attractions and paraphernalia theme parks have to offer!

Featured Blogger

Presenting non-stop action from the next generation of Earth's heroes in the webcomic, Starbolts! There's action, adventure, romance, drama, comedy and more! That's not all! Starbolt Productions also produces a web show called Comic Showcase where good and bad comics are featured! So, if you're interested in high adventure or in-depth reviews of comic books of the past and today this is the place to be!